Analytical Essay Rubric
Use the rubric to plan, peer-review, and revise an analytical essay about Coraline.
Task
Write an analytical essay that answers one question about Coraline. Use evidence from the novel and explain how Gaiman's choices shape meaning.
Criteria
| Criterion | Emerging (1) | Developing (2) | Proficient (3) | Extending (4) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thesis and argument | States a topic or retells the story. Little sense of a claim. | Offers a claim, but it is broad or partly descriptive. | Offers a clear claim that answers the question and frames the essay. | Offers a precise, insightful claim that shapes a sustained argument. |
| Evidence | Uses little evidence, or evidence that does not support the claim. | Uses some relevant evidence, but it may be general or repeated. | Selects relevant evidence from across the novel and integrates it into the argument. | Selects precise, well-chosen evidence and uses it to develop a nuanced argument. |
| Analysis of technique | Names a technique without explaining its effect. | Explains a technique, but the link to meaning is simple or uneven. | Explains how techniques shape the reader's response and support the claim. | Analyses technique with precision and considers alternative interpretations. |
| Structure | Ideas are hard to follow; paragraphs may not have a clear focus. | Uses a basic introduction, body, and conclusion, with some uneven links. | Organises the essay logically, with clear topic sentences and transitions. | Structures the argument strategically, so each paragraph builds on the last. |
| Expression and control | Frequent errors make meaning difficult to follow. | Mostly understandable, but errors and informal phrasing distract. | Uses clear, accurate academic language with some variety and control. | Uses precise, fluent academic language and a distinctive control of tone. |
Marking guide
| Level | Marks | What it looks like |
|---|---|---|
| Extending | 17-20 | A controlled argument with precise evidence and thoughtful analysis. |
| Proficient | 13-16 | A clear argument with relevant evidence and explained techniques. |
| Developing | 9-12 | A recognisable argument with uneven evidence or analysis. |
| Emerging | 5-8 | Mostly description, with limited evidence and analysis. |
Student checklist
- My introduction names the novel, the author, and my claim.
- Each body paragraph has a topic sentence that advances the argument.
- I use evidence from more than one part of the novel.
- I explain the technique and its effect, not just the plot.
- I use quotation marks accurately and explain each quotation.
- My conclusion returns to the claim and says why it matters.
- I have proofread for spelling, punctuation, and tense.
- I have used Australian spelling.
Peer feedback
| Glow: what works? | Grow: what is the next move? |
|---|---|
One specific revision I will make: ____________________________________________
Teacher notes
Use the rubric formatively in Week 4. Students should highlight the level they are aiming for and one criterion they will revise.
Do not reward plot summary. If a paragraph could be written without reading the novel, it is probably too general.
When marking, record one strength and one next step rather than only a total. The total is less useful than the criterion pattern.
Support: reduce the essay to three paragraphs and provide a paragraph frame. Extension: require a counter-argument or an evaluation of two interpretations.